Is Google's Knol already becoming a den of spam?

Heard about Knol yet? It's Google's Xth new service, and it's a place where you can put up "an authoritative article about a specific topic". That's a knol too. Article=knol.

My first encounter with Knol was at Pointless Games, an entry by my friend Bernie DeKoven, a funsmith of the first water balloon. A knol, Knol tells us, is "a unit of knowledge". I used to think a thought was one one of those, and I maybe even wrote that once somewhere; but when I search Google now for results that include my surname and exclude knol and google (specifically, searls "unit of knowledge " -google -knol) I find nothing but articles by Searle, who apparently did say that. (Hard to tell. All the results are for abstracts of academic articles buried behind usewalls of various kinds. Meanwhile it annoys me that Google includes misspellings in its "advanced" search.)

(I mention those ahead of the current top result in a search of Google News for knol, because that brings up eWeek's Google's Wikipedia Answer: A Second Shooter on the Google Knol-Wikipedia Battle. There I was greeted by a giant Dell ad that tells you to click here or wait 12 seconds, which it counts down in rolling red lettering, like the clock on a bomb about to go off, absolutely distracting from the ad itself. That's a "feature" that makes one annoyed at both Dell and eWeek simultaneously. Nice work, guys.)

Naturally, Wikipedia has much more to say about Knol than does Google. It begins,

Knol is a Google project which aims to include user-written articles on topics ranging from "scientific concepts, to medical information, from geographical and historical, to entertainment, from product information, to how-to-fix-it instructions."[1] The brainchild of Udi Manber of Google,[2] it was announced on December 13, 2007 and was opened in beta to the public on July 23, 2008[3] with a few hundred articles mostly in the health and medical field.[2][4]

Knol pages are "meant to be the first thing someone who searches for this topic for the first time will want to read", according to Manber.[1] The term knol, which Google defines as a "unit of knowledge",[5] refers to both the project and an article in the project.[1] Several experts see Knol as Google's attempt to compete with Wikipedia,[6] while others point out the differences between the projects.[7] (revision link)

To put it briefly, they are not the same. They don't compete.

But that doesn't mean Knol isn't competitive with other sites and services. I think Jason Calacanis nails it pretty well when he asks, Is Google A Content Company? Of Course It Is. So What Should Publishers Do? If you're a writer or publisher, (like,um, we are), Jason's piece is relevant reading. It's a bit on the alarmist side, but Jason cops to that, wondering out loud whether complainers are "crybabies or canaries in the coal mine".

Either way, we need to face the fact that Google has become a platform. Or, as Dave Winer put it the other day, a coral reef. These things grow over a long period of time, and support many life forms. The tougher trick is to be generative. A generative platform is not about lock in. Rather, it's about opening things up, and being supportive of more than those things that depend on you directly. In The Future of the Internet — and How to Stop it., Jonathan Zittrain illustrates the PC's generativity as the flexible waist in an hourglass, rather than the bottom of a stack:

Nice that he includes Linux in there. We should add that Linux cares less about what it runs on, or what runs on it, than either of the other two OS platforms. Which brings us to Jonathan's illustration of the generative role played by the Internet itself:

Google is at the top level of that diagram. More significantly, it has a business interest in the success of its dependents (as do Microsoft and Apple in PC diagram). Wikipedia doesn't have that. Big difference.

At this point I see no threat by Knol to publications like ours or Jason's. I do see a possible threat to academic journals. As I discovered in my search above, most academic journals lock up their archives. Knol's methods and ambitions line up very nicely with those of academics who don't like to see their writing locked away — and who would like the bylined credit they don't get in Wikipedia.

With the possible exeption of Sars's post, all that stuff is commercial gaming. "Units of knowledge" these aren't.

Knol will succeed if serious contributors outnumber the gamers. I don't hold much hope for that, even though I remain charmed that Bernie DeKoven's knol about Pointless Games was what launched me into this long post.

Ironically, I just ended up here after publishing a knol on website usability... then started skipping round, erm, Google... for opinion formers.

I agree with you by the way, that gaming might be a problem. Difficult in some cases to tell the difference too, I guess. Most people with knowledge of a subject fall into one of two categories - enthusiast or pro. Cutting off the pro's reduces the content generation and, if that content is of real value, then I see no harm in author recognition either. I'm in no doubt that the guerrilla "marketeers" will be on it like a shot, but, by the same token, the UGC fanboys en masse will be onto it like a shot..What i really do hope is that Google use the ratings system properly as it grows, and a score out of 5 isn't going to be enough to separate wheat from chaff, but a decent system might just be enough to maintain the integrity of the content.

As Linux continues to play an ever increasing role in corporate data centers and institutions, ensuring the integrity and protection of these systems must be a priority. With 60% of the world's websites and an increasing share of organization's mission-critical workloads running on Linux, failing to stop malware and other advanced threats on Linux can increasingly impact an organization's reputation and bottom line.

Most companies incorporate backup procedures for critical data, which can be restored quickly if a loss occurs. However, fewer companies are prepared for catastrophic system failures, in which they lose all data, the entire operating system, applications, settings, patches and more, reducing their system(s) to “bare metal.” After all, before data can be restored to a system, there must be a system to restore it to.

In this one hour webinar, learn how to enhance your existing backup strategies for better disaster recovery preparedness using Storix System Backup Administrator (SBAdmin), a highly flexible bare-metal recovery solution for UNIX and Linux systems.